Overview
Request 1191336 new
No description set
- Created by ojkastl_buildservice
- In state new
Loading...
Request History
ojkastl_buildservice created request
openSUSE Build Service is sponsored by
ojkastl_buildservice created request
Hi,
any explanation for this? Usually packages in this project are maintained by people who also maintain the respective service in the openSUSE infrastructure. Do you want to become the maintainer of our Step CA deployment? ;-)
Also, the package is linked from home:darix:apps, ideally patches should be submitted there or at least coordinated with Marcus as to not have conflicts later.
Oh, it is actually a link, not just branched? Then it might make sense to submit SRs to darix package in the first place.
Or it might make sense to maintain them in the security project and have oS:infrastructure just link there.
But that is up to you (the team) to decide.
Sorry, I forgot the comment. I was talking to darix on submitting step-cli to Tumbleweed. Which I had packaged, submitted to the security project and sent a SR to Factory. See SR#1186955 and SR#1191257.
We agreed on removing "my" package from the security project and instead submit the one from oS:infrastructure.
Hence I would like to help with maintaining both packages.
Sorry, but I'm not sure this is right.
I do not think openSUSE:infrastructure should qualify as a devel project for development and subsequent submissions directly to Factory.
Rather, we prefer to link from Factory to openSUSE:infrastructure if a package is missing from (or not new enough in) the backports for Leap.
Some packages which are neither in backports nor in Factory we link from darix or package directly here.
The packages here should ideally be stable too, we even have a rule to avoid installations directly from devel projects in our policy: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Infrastructure_policy. That would become interesting if our project becomes a devel project itself. ;-)
I think the packages in question here should be maintained in a proper devel project and submitted to Factory. Of course, feel free to submit it from here to such a devel project and we can adjust the link once in Factory.
Then I would propose the following:
@darix, @crameleon, what do you guys think?
That sounds perfect to me!
Darix' state of the package is submitted to security in SR#1191507
Also, I appreciate your effort in getting it to Factory! Don't mean to block it.
Thanks, but no worries, I was not interpreting this a blocking at all.
SR#1200973 sends step-cli to Factory.
@darix: I am not allowed to submit your step-ca package to security, would you do the honours? I can help maintaining.